Fri, May 09, 2008
ez access
Subscriber services | Subscriptions
Custom clipper icon
The proposed Solana Generating Station would use Abengoa Solar's technology in which long rows of mirrors track the sun from east to west in order to best focus sunlight onto receiver pipes.
Photo courtesty of Abengoa Solar
More Photos (6):
40%
How much U.S. energy demand will grow by 2030.
$420 Billion
The government funding needed to make 70 percent of U.S. electricity solar-powered by 2050.
62
The number of square miles of solar farms needed to provide solar power to all Tucson Electric Power Co. customers.
20%
The premium Solana customers would pay for solar power.
Source: Testimony before the House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment
Pros, cons of solar plants
Development costs
Point: Developing solar plants is expensive, and ratepayers would have to shoulder both solar investment and the increasing cost of fossil fuels, said Valerie Rauluk, CEO of Venture Catalyst Inc.
Counterpoint: The cost of conventional generation is less expensive than the cost of solar technology, but by 2020, solar energy could compete with other types of energy without public subsidies, said Tom Hansen, a vice president at Tucson Electric Power Co.
Consumer costs
Point: Some people are willing to pay a premium price to promote renewable energy, and we should use all of our resources to meet the growing demand for energy, said Barbara Lockwood, renewable energy manager for Arizona Public Service.
Meanwhile, favorable policies in European markets spurred rapid growth in the solar energy industry, said Kate Maracas, vice president of Arizona operations for Madrid, Spain-based Abengoa Solar, which would own Solana.
Counterpoint: There's a limit to what you can ask customers to pay, and rates already were high in those nations, making increases seem small, Rauluk said.
Water use
Point: A solar thermal plant uses more water than a coal-fired plant, said Rep. Bart Gordon, D-Tenn. And drought is a concern.
"It's important we don't replace one problem with another," he said.
Counterpoint: Solana would use 2,700 acre-feet of water per year, comparable to a small coal-fired plant. But that's far less than the 12,000 acre-feet per year currently used for agriculture on the same piece of land, Maracas said.
Land use
Point: We have a lot of unused land in Arizona that is prime for turning sunlight into electricity, Lockwood said.
Counterpoint: The industry would have to be careful to avoid building on environmentally sensitive land, she said.
Related points: Increasingly efficient technology eventually will reduce the space needed to produce solar power, Hansen said. Both utility-scale solar-power production and rooftop solar production would be needed to generate enough power for all of Tucson, Hansen said.

Business

House members, Arizonans meet

Talking solar power — on a big scale

By Becky Pallack
Arizona Daily Star
Tucson, Arizona | Published: 03.18.2008
A congressional subcommittee and business leaders met Monday in Tucson to talk about the potential of utility-scale solar power — and subsidies to help make it work. The subject is timely, as a federal investment tax credit for solar power will expire this summer.
On the line is the proposed Solana Generating Station, a 3-square-mile solar power plant that could be running by 2011 near Gila Bend, 130 miles northwest of Tucson. Arizona Public Service would buy 30 years of power for $4 billion to supply up to 70,000 homes with electricity.The so-called solar thermal station — which would focus sunlight along a network of pipes to create steam to power generator turbines — won't be built without an eight-year extension of the tax credit, business executives said. Members of the House Science and Technology subcommittee on energy and environment, including Reps. Gabrielle Giffords and Harry Mitchell, both D-Ariz., discussed the pluses and minuses of solar on a big scale.
● Contact reporter Becky Pallack at 573-4224 or at bpallack@azstarnet.com.
Save Money! Subscribe to the Arizona Daily Star.
Go Back